Battletomes from last 2 years: From "best" to "worst"

[Zanzou]

The whirlwind that was 2019 came with both a lot of praise and a lot of complaints for Age of Sigmar rules.  There has never been as much support for the game as there is now, so I thought some people might be interested in a fresh reflection thread. I realize how we judge good and bad differs greatly, and I don't think one thing alone (such as win rate) can fully judge a book.  How do the battletomes (at least the ones that you're semi-familiar with) over the last 2 years compare to you, from best to worst?

 

As a suggested starting point:

Absolute "Best" - Great internal balance with a variety of different well-supported builds, can hold its own at least somewhat competitively, is fun to play with suitably thematic rules for the faction, and for tie-breaking perhaps consider things outside the rules (quality stories / lore,  quality new artwork, lack of grammar/ spelling errors)

Absolute "Worst" - Punishes any attempt at build creativity, and has very few reasonably valid ways to play. The relative power level of the book is too extreme (far worse or far better than the large majority of books).  Playing the faction is much more boring than it should be because of the book.  

[PJetski]

I would try to categorize them like this:

Great - Good internal balance, many top tier builds, lots of variety in list building

• Hedonites of Slaanesh, Skaven, Slaves to Darkness, Ossiarch Bonereapers, Orruk Warclans

Good - Good internal balance, at least one one competitive tournament list, and lots of variety in list building even if some of them aren't the strongest options

• Fyreslayers, Cities of Sigmar, Legions of Nagash, Flesh-eater Courts

Okay - Poor internal balance, little variety in list building, but they can get at least 1 viable build for competitive play

• Daughters of Khaine, Idoneth Deepkin, Sylvaneth, Stormcast Eternals, Maggotkin of Nurgle, Blades of Khorne, Ogor Mawtribes

Bad - Poor internal balance, no powerful meta tournament builds, low variety

• Nighthaunt, Beasts of Chaos, Gloomspite Gitz

I don't think I can accurately rate the new KO and DOT books but my first impression is that KO would be in "Okay" and DOT would be in "Good". 

[zilberfrid]

I don't think Bonereapers have a good internal balance, with the Petrifex the way they are. The book is also externally balanced a lot better if you disregard that.

Similar to Hedonites, there really aren't too many different builds you see.

Books that make a few lists that squash other lists are simply not good. They don't bring variety to the table, and make it disheartening to even try playing.

I don't know that much about AoS rules, but as I would rate them:

Good:

Cities, many choices, not all balanced as well as they could be, but it has a quite a few viable options.

Kharadron (at a glance), I don't know too much of, but it seems quite fun.

Bad:

Bonereapers: Petrifex are not balanced, within and without. They also simply have too many exceptions to general rules, and seem unfun to play against. 

Hedonites: The FAQ did not change internal balance, just external, there are not too many ways to play it.

Edited January 16, 2020 by zilberfrid

[Forrix]

Man, that's a lot to think about it. I might come back and edit this later but for now...

Best- Cities of Sigmar. I like the allegiance ability approach with the different cities. It always bugs me when the book gives you a bunch of command traits that you'll never use because of the more standard subfaction format. There are definitely some garbage warscrolls and builds but I've built A LOT of very different lists using most of the different cities even if Tempest Eye and Hallowheart are typically the top choices for my lists. The only real drawback I've found is that this army is very intensive in both hobby time and money for someone who didn't have whole 8th edition armies sitting around.

Worst-Hard to say. I want to say Maggotkin but that's 2018 :P. I think I will say Bonereapers as though its both fairly new and I don't play it I've seen a lot of it in my local scene and everyone is running the same list with just a few variations in tournaments. It seems to be a victim of the worse of the subfaction format were one subfaction is so much better than the others that it basically becomes the battletome. The external balance seems pretty badly out of whack too and rife with NPE.

[DerZauberer]

Maybe this topic would need a disclaimer as it seems to focus on competitive criterias?

For me a Battletome is much more then powerlevel and meta defining builds. Art, story, battleplans, an army which feels like in the fluff, fluffy artefacts, traits, spells... this makes a great battletome for me.

Gloomspite Gitz for example made an amazing job to tie such loose allegiances together into one bigger picture, giving you 4 "races" to play with and combine them as you like. The Allegiance ability is  - from a competitive standpoint - weak, but it just feels right when the moon shines onto the battlefield and your whole army gets crazy mad and bonkers (like 5+ rules take place simultaniously).  And GG have a very competetive build, with a heavy focus on Stabbas and the great Spellcasting and Endless Spells, wich features Grotz, Spiders, Troggoths and sometimes Squigs. Seems great to me, right?

Orruk Warclan on the other hand made them really good and competitve, but besides "Yo boiz, Gordrakk iz here!" theres nothing to tie Bonesplitterz and Ironjawz together rather then just Waaagh! energy. Most art was reused, the fluff was rather blant and artifacts are pretty much +X, -Y. Doing a lot of damage fits orruks great, but being pretty much auto-hit machines is somehow weird and doesnt fit the army at all. Spamming auto-hitting Ardboyz - the least 'eavy boyz - for winning in a Allegiance thought combining both Orruk Warclans? You never use your "ultimate orky power" so you don't loose on auto-hitting? Rather disappointing, but hell, super competetive.

Hedonites of Slaanesh are super good, but when you allways see all points spend into the same 2-3 Hero Warscrolls and as little points as possible in battleline, is it a good battletome?

Edited January 17, 2020 by DerZauberer
Spelling!

[Zanzou]

18 minutes ago, DerZauberer said:

Maybe this topic would need a disclaimer as it seems to focus on competitive criterias?

For me a Battletome is much more then powerlevel and meta defining builds. Art, story, battleplans, an army which feels like in the fluff, fluffy artefacts, traits, spells... this makes a great battletome for me.

At least me personally I would welcome these alternative responses as well.  This was just my bias showing. In the end I just want to see which recent examples the community holds up as what should be aimed for again in a great battletome vs things that have fallen flat... of course it throw things off if the book with the worst rules has the best lore but that's the way she goes.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Zanzou

[Eldarain]

Gloomspite is the best book. If the game was designed with it as a touchstone it would be fantastic.

 

[zilberfrid]

2 minutes ago, Zanzou said:

At least me personally I would welcome these alternative responses as well.  In the end I just want to see which recent examples the community holds up as what should be aimed for again in a great battletome vs things that have fallen flat... of course it throw things off if the book with the worst rules has the best lore but that's the way she goes.

Well, the best books would have a 50% win rate with all subfactions, and all warscrolls would have a function. They don't need to have a function in every subfaction though.

Subfactions should give a different way to play the game, with abilities and warscroll choices that reflect their lore.

Being able to make your own subfactions (like the Kharadron), is a very good bonus.

The book ideally has a few short stories in them, to illustrate how the faction and subfactions works in-game.

[Kramer]

Absolute best in 2019 is Ogors imo.
Great internal balance* & will end up between 45% en 55% win rate i'm guessing. 
Fun rules from the mawpot being thematic and not too influential terrain, but also the look out gnoblar. Then spells, artefacts and everything else. 
Fleshed out the lore. 
Good artwork.
Apart from the thundertusk everything has a good reason and role in the book. 
And the single best narrative scenario I have seen in any of the books (the old fyreslayers one got close though)

*it's a shame everybody is so focussed on the stonehorn but there are many succes stories of Underguts & Bloodgullut as well

[Fairbanks]

Fyreslayers and Hedonites: Both had rules that weren’t in the book but in White Dwarf instead

Beasts of Chaos: Received a decent book at the time, but have never had a chance since.

FEC and Daughters: One list to rule the meta, and in the darkness warp it.

Skaven, Cities, Gloomspite: Should each be 3-5 separate Battletomes

Otherwise, I’ve thought they’d been pretty good.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Fairbanks

[JackStreicher]

The Armies I can rate

Best - Daughters of Khaine: Strong Comp. every unit can have it‘s uses. Fun to play

Good - Legions of Nagash: Good Unit variance and strong AB

Orruk Warclans: Very fluffy, diverse builds and every unit is viable. There‘s a shadow hanging over it however due to grossly underpriced and overperforming Warchanters (+100 points pls, the buff is nuts) and grossly underpriced Ardboys (should be 130 AT LEAST for 5, their stats and Rules are bananas) which cumulate in a combination of both which is destroying the game experience.

fyreslayers - They feel right, are fun to play against (and with) and every units seems to be viable.

mediocre to good - Cities of Sigmar: Fun to play, can be powerful, pretty horrible internal balance which is mostly due to very over the tops pricing of mediocre units

Sylvaneth: Just all around okay and fun to play, they just lack unit variance 
 

mediocre to bad - Nighthaunt: is fun to play but is too reliant on squishy pricy heroes, Also totally broken if you manage to get your 10+ charges off every time

mediocre - Ossiarchs: Very Strong, the playstyle ruins the game for your opponent, I find the playstyle also boring (sold mine). These should induce fear, all they induce is boredom and strange smily-faces.

Bad - Idoneth: No unit variance, horrible internal balance (crappy rules), there‘s only two viable ways to play them, Artefacts are utter trash (trash of the oceans...) and the command abilities are also pretty bad, even the subfactions are only „meh“ - this needs a rewrite or a change to „Eeldoneth Derpkins“ - We only have three units: Soulscryers, Kings and Eeeels

 

Stormcast - Well... chambers that do not synergise at all among one-another, shooting as the only viable (extremely annoying and onesies) build, overall bad internal balance.
 

 

Edited January 17, 2020 by JackStreicher

[Mutton]

Best: Orruk Warclans - A huge range of depth in its options and unit choices, seamlessly merges two entire factions into one cohesive force, and lifts the orruks into the top echelons of the competitive scene without being massively busted (some might say a little too strong, but that can be easily fixed). I don't play orruks, but every time I look at the variety of tribes and list-building opportunities, it gets me excited.

Worst: Beasts of Chaos - Somehow this book kept me from playing beastmen, despite loving them since the early days of Fantasy AND already having a sizable army. Even when it came out, most units underperformed from lackluster abilities and warscrolls. Despite being the "chaos monster" faction, had some of the worst monsters in the game. On top of all of that, the lore constantly reminds you how despicable it is for beasts to align themselves with any one god, but then forces you into taking marked armies because they're simply superior. To this day it's still languishing near the bottom, and even die-hard beast lords rarely bring out their toys. I honestly don't know what they could do to even fix them at this point, which is part of why they dive beyond even the legendarily miserable experience of Hedonites.

Good: Fyreslayers, Cities, Sylvaneth, Slaves, Khorne

Okay, but problematic: DoK, Idoneth, Nighthaunt, Legions, Skaven, Ossiarch, FEC

Poor: Hedonites - Shouldn't have left anyone's desk with how completely broken the base mechanics of this faction were, and the fact that players were shelving their armies in protest goes a long way to illuminate how poorly thought out this thing was. At least it can theoretically be fixed in FAQ (and maybe already has).

Most Disappointing: Mawtribes - Though I won't deny the power boost the Ogors received as a result of this book, there were simply too many missed opportunities exhibited at every turn of the page. Cool rules addendum'd to be useless. Unnecessary restrictions on just about every trait or artifact. Only 2/6 tribes are playable (maybe 3 if you have a zillion ironblasters lying around). About half of the warscrolls felt like they weren't even looked at and copy/pasted over from 1st edition and will never see the table in any significant number. Nerfs to things that didn't need them. You're mostly pigeonholed into a handful of list types, with little way to experiment beyond that. I love the Ogors, and Mawtribes are in a decent place power-wise, all things considered, but when you look at how much of the book you're really ignoring to get that power, it can't be anything but disappointing. The book I'd give the "most squandered potential" award to.

Favorite: Gloomspite Gitz - A smorgasbord of units, battalions, and army compositions that essentially combine 3 small factions into one. There are so many ways to build this army, and it feels like you could spend years expanding and trying new things. Its only downsides are its lack of competitiveness in certain areas (namely anything that isn't hordes of grots), overpriced units, hyper-specific battalions, and some lackluster random mechanics. But even with these foibles, the spirit of the faction shines through and can make for some brilliant games of AoS (so long as you aren't going full 120 greenies).

 

Edited January 17, 2020 by Mutton

[Tropical Ghost General]

Going from my personal experience with the books I own:

- Best: Ogors. It has issues certainly, but it also has options. Has good competitive build as well as fun, fluffy builds. 

Worst: Nighthaunt. Ever unit is nearly identical, so very little flavour when making lists, do you take the unit that does -1 rend 1 damage or the other unit that does -1 rend 1 damage. The only book to not have sub-factions. A lot of synergies that should work but just don't work. They've been a main army for a long time and are severely lacking in many areas. Best looking models though. 

[angrycontra]

I'm gonna list my personal favorites and least favorites. Any book not listed is somewhere in the middle. 

Best (in order of release)

Nurgle - Lots of fun options and synergies. Sure it was released bit too early (lack of wholly within and unmodified rolls) but overall when it was released it was easily the best btome released up to that point and over the years the point and other errata fixes have improved the book.

Gloomspite - Like some others here have said, aos would be near perfect if every tome was designed with the same mindset as this tome. Inner balance is great, nothing too weak or too broken, fun allegiance power (even though it is rather underwhelming at times), great battleline and battalion options.

Flesh eater courts - This book has its issues (and gristlegore was broken at launch) and FEC need more models but overall it is great battletome. Inner balance is overall pretty good and lots of battalions to choose from. I also like how there is actually small punishment for taking grand court (losing delusions in addition to c.trait and artifacts) something I wish became a norm with these subfactions.

Fyreslayers - apart from the still underpriced Hgb and maybe the fact that Hermdar lodge is a bit too good I genuinely think that this tome is great. Every unit has some purpose, number of options is surprisingly great for a faction with so few models. I actually feel sad for all the super competetive players out there who can't see anything that Hgb spam, to me they are missing all the fun that comes with this book (really hope gw at least remove that ridiculous mass bonus from hgb in the future.)

Orruk warclans - other than grossly underpriced warchanters, there is little I find to complain here. Lots of viable unit options in mixed lists. Improves both pure bonesplitterz and ironjaws. Great list of spells, battlelines, battalions etc. Love the different clans too, pretty much every clan in the book is viable in some way and thanks to big waagh even clanless faction works. 

Disciples of tzeentch - Yeah sure, it's probably too early to say this now but looking at the battletome, it's looking great. Many weak underpowered ****** units from previous tome have received significant changes, allegiance power is fun (like the agendas and how they synergize with destiny dice), internal balance seems goodish and the balance of those various cults seems good. 

And then time for the...

Worst (in order of release again)

Stormcast eternals - this book is a mess. The internal balance is terrible. Many units are very underwhelming by today's standards. Tons of useless subfactions/battalions. Too many units overlapping and doing same thing with varying degree of success (this is why I don't want to see any mixed duardin tome in the future, I don't trust in Gw's ability to balance that properly).

Nighthaunt - Biggest mistake gw did here was giving most units from the faction to legions of nagash which has much better allegiance power. Nighthaunt do have some good stuff in them but the battletome also suffers from having way too many units filling exact same role (reapers, bladegheist, harridans, glavewraiths). 

I'm not gonna list beast of chaos here, because as underpowered faction as it may be, I find the battletome quite fun plus most of the issues could be fixed in future ghb/errata/new warscroll for gors etc.

Skaventide - as someone who loves skaven, I sure hate this book (although less now than before thanks to plague monk warscroll change). The whole fact that there are gazillion ways to make the most cowardly faction in all of aos immune to bshock is just baffling (orruks are much more cowardly now than skaven). Terrain for skaven is awful to transport and its effects on the battlefield are too meh. Inner balance is still poor and battalions are terrible (which means less artifacts to play with). Battleline options are worst of all the factions as they limit your unit choices massively.

Slaanesh - Do I even need to state all the problems with this book? The summon mechanic is broken, and it forces slaanesh players to spam heroes and this doesn't even reflect properly in points. Force enemy to fight last is too abusive mechanic and more reasons to just spam keepers. Combine previous mechanic with double pile in command ability and you got one broken faction. I'm sure the recent errata at least somewhat helped to fix this book but in all honesty, I doubt slaanesh will be properly balanced until it gets new book.

Cities of sigmar - ok this book technically isn't that bad. There are lot of great ways to build this army and it is very inspiring book to make your own cool themed armies... But... the balance between cities pretty terrible. Just compare best (hallowheart and tempest eye) with the worst (anvilgard and phoenicum) and you know what I mean. Once again too many bad unit options that do same thing. Darkling covens (minus sorcerers and maybe darkshards) are terrible. Battalions city locked and realms are city locked too (and there's only fire and life to choose from). Extremely limited command trait and artifact choices. 

Ossiarch bonereapers - I just need to say two words: Petrifex elite. This sub faction is the heart and soul of ALL the problems that plague ossiarchs. Now I don't necessarily deny that ossiarchs would be overcosted without PE but if PE didn't exist gw could easily lower their points or give some units (that are not mortek guard) +1 sv by default. Obviously katakros save bonus would also have to go (otherwise his faction would become the new PE). I also dislike bshock immunity being allegiance power, I mean that's just stupid, just remove bshock phase already 'cos so many factions ignore it anyway.

[Kasper]

11 hours ago, PJetski said:

I would try to categorize them like this:

Great - Good internal balance, many top tier builds, lots of variety in list building

• Hedonites of Slaanesh, Skaven, Slaves to Darkness, Ossiarch Bonereapers, Orruk Warclans

Good - Good internal balance, at least one one competitive tournament list, and lots of variety in list building even if some of them aren't the strongest options

• Fyreslayers, Cities of Sigmar, Legions of Nagash, Flesh-eater Courts

Okay - Poor internal balance, little variety in list building, but they can get at least 1 viable build for competitive play

• Daughters of Khaine, Idoneth Deepkin, Sylvaneth, Stormcast Eternals, Maggotkin of Nurgle, Blades of Khorne, Ogor Mawtribes

Bad - Poor internal balance, no powerful meta tournament builds, low variety

• Nighthaunt, Beasts of Chaos, Gloomspite Gitz

I don't think I can accurately rate the new KO and DOT books but my first impression is that KO would be in "Okay" and DOT would be in "Good". 

I would agree with pretty much all of your list, but knock Hedonites of Slaanesh and Ossiarch Bonereapers out of "Great". 

Hedonites of Slaanesh got quite a horrible internal balance considering the whole depravity system really forces you to go all out on heroes, and Keepers of Secrets are miles ahead of the other heroes (The exalted chariot is quite nice, though due to worse locus/no excess of violence, likely worse than KoS). This quite often leads to lists with multiple Keepers and MSU battleline.

I don't have as much experience with Ossiarch Bonereapers, but they seem to be somewhat in the same boat, where you sort of have to go Petrifix, and every list I see fields loads of Mortek Guard where it revolves around keeping them alive/buffing them to near unkillable.

So even if both armies got top tier builds, they feel very monotone and very much the same.

[Joseph Mackay]

Cities Of Sigmar - bad. Units overcosted, condensed rules across the book taking away the ‘flavour’ of some units, no synergy or benefit to mixing factions even though that’s how they want you to play them. These factions really needed their own books.

Ossiarch Bonereapers - bad. Petrifex Elite is a Hag-Narr situation where it’s bonuses are just so much better than the others. The whole Hekatos system is cool and all but if that doesn’t get rolled out to all the other factions then they should probably cost a lot more points (I’m talking about the fact the unit leaders act like heroes for the purposes of using command abilities and death saves). Morghasts and Stalkers are not pointed appropriately.

Stormcast Eternals - bad. Sacrosanct Chamber units are so much better than the older stuff and points don’t reflect this (Retributors and Evocators are too close in points but so far away from each other in what they do). The army has a few game breaking negative play experiences, Gavriels command ability stacking allowing you a guaranteed charge from reserves, Longstrikes and Hurricane Raptors counting as stationary after using Scions, the Comet is way too good-for a start it’s range allows you to cast it outside of dispell range and still hit a ton of units.

Idoneth Deepkin - bad. I don’t agree with the majority that everything but eels is bad, however eels are just so good that nothing else is really worth taking. Volturnos + eels is a negative play experience.

Flesh-Eater Courts - unsure. I kind of think the old book was better and just needed some tweaks. I dislike how all the battalions lost the good rules and kept the bad ones (Ghoul Patrol adding models to units, Royal Family summoning Ghoul Kings). Feeding Frenzy went too far, before it was bad and hardly ever went off and now it’s too good, Savage Strike was fine but combined with Feeding Frenzy it was too good. The endless spells I think are a bit too expensive (the Corpsemere Stampede at least), the throne is basically pointless after using your summon. Mixed lists (ie Ghouls, Horrors and Flayers) are difficult to make due to needing Courtiers of the right type to babysit them. Archregent is too expensive, change his summon from 20 to 10 Ghouls and drop his points to 200. The internal balance between units is good I think, but the army needs more units.

Slaanesh - bad. All I can really say is it’s always a negative play experience facing them.

Nighthaunt - unsure. I think Ethereal and Fly were given too much value when they pointed these units. Aside from that I can’t say much as they generally don’t get played around here. Legions Of Nagash being allowed to use most of the army was a bad decision which they seem to have learned from with Bonereapers.

Fyreslayers - bad. Points costs are all wrong. It feels to me like they changed the points costs based on what was happening before the book and changed the rules afterwards resulting in units now costing more than they should (Battlesmith stood out as the first noticeable issue). Hearthguard and Vulkites are too similar in points creating a situation where Hearthguard are being taken instead. I like that the Grimwrath and Doomseeker no longer count as Leaders. I dislike the nerfs to Magmadroths (reduced range on fire breath, volcanic blood nerf etc), extra wounds was appreciated though.

[Icegoat]

Worst by far was cities of sigmar no viable builds without buying two new whole armies to go with your existing dwarfs/empire/elfs delete as a appropriate. A total gutting of all entire ranges within the army. A despicable act and heinous money grab. I'm sure the army will be squatted by next year. We don't want normal humans when we can have more storm cast. 

Best is gloomspite gitz the new stone trolls are the best model kit I've painted and built in an age. And it made old warhammer fantasy units viable and better the entire opposite of cities of sigmar mass squatting and degrading of old units. 

[Dolomyte]

My A tier would be Gloomspite, Skaven, Cities, Mawtribes, BoK, And Nurgle

not competitively focused but all books with huge variety of way to build armies that can at least stay on the table for a fun game.

i really dislike deepkin, fyreslayers, flesh eater courts, slaanesh. 

fyreslayers have literally one unit hearthguard. They are the most extreme. The other three are also severely limited on options or at least viable ones. Show me the battleline and other unit heavy slaanesh list. I’ll wait. 
 

bonereapers, mawtribes, dot, ko, others are all in the middle. Bonereapers would be a tier if petrifex was ignore one rend, but as is they are way too tempting to run, despite the fact I think stalliarch will win more games due to scenario. 

[Jaskier]

11 minutes ago, Dolomyte said:

Bonereapers would be a tier if petrifex was ignore one rend, but as is they are way too tempting to run, despite the fact I think stalliarch will win more games due to scenario. 

As someone who religiously follows the tournament scene, it's much worse than you think it is. Stalliarch Lords are good but they still have absolutely nothing on Petrifex, and this is backed up by the stats that I've seen so far. If you're running Bonereapers competitively, you have zero reason not to run Petrifex. It is the most stupidly obvious sub-faction imbalance in the game since Hagg Narr for Daughters of Khaine.

From a competitive stand-point, I will agree with the majority and say that certain books - particularly Hedonites (if you don't spam strong heroes, you're doing it wrong) - aren't fun to play against and have horrible internal balance. Others like Gloomspite Gitz and Mawtribes aren't as likely to go 5-0 but offer a far greater variety of fun builds that are engaging both to play with and against. My favourite faction of those released in the past year is Cities of Sigmar, but that's due to the sheer variety on offer, even if it's not particularly well balanced internally. My least favourite is a toss-up between Fyreslayers and Slaanesh, both mono-build armies that just aren't that intuitive to play against.

Side-note; I really like the Tzeentch book. Changehost and Horrors/Flamers look like the top dogs (so not that different from before) but they've made a conscious effort to make everything at least viable.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Jaskier

[Zanzou]

Definitely very divided opinions on almost every book here already, but there does seem to be a couple examples that are repeatedly being highlighted as standout favorites.

The Gloomspite Gitz faction / battletome treatment for example - despite some grumblings and only having a modest tournament win rate hovering around 45-46% - it is still repeatedly being marked as a favorite here and could be an example of an ideal book to strive for, for many in the community (if books would be arranged/balanced similarly).

There are clearly some other factions that are consistently in the okay / good range, and others that are more controversial but it would be really great to get some more opinions.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Zanzou

[l1censetochill]

Yeah, it really feels like the divide here is strong between people who gauge "Best" as "whatever wins the most games" and "Best" as "whatever book feels the most fun and varied in the builds it can offer" (I fall into the latter camp, personally).

For me, the best book I've seen in all of AOS so far is Cities of Sigmar. Internally there may be a few units and Cities that are over- or underpowered relative to the others, but the sheer variety the book offers between the different City allegiances and sub-factions is just incredible. Cities armies can, quite literally, do it all - magic heavy, shooting heavy, speedy alpha strike, giant hordes of infantry, mixes of all of the above, you name it. They may not all be equally powerful, but that's not only the book's fault; it's also, at least in part, due to an inherently imbalanced metagame that rewards certain strategies over others. And the book is still new, so I feel like we probably haven't fully seen what it's capable of, either - the first Hallowheart list to win a GT was built around Soulscream Bridge and Handgunner spam so now that's what everyone is trying/talking about, but I guarantee there are other viable Cities (and Hallowheart) builds out there that haven't been discovered yet.

It's the same with Gloomspite - tons of options, some inevitably better than others, but all with distinctive personalities and playstyles that are at least somewhat viable. It's a book that really gives you room to experiment and play with different builds. That's what makes a great book, in my opinion.

As far as the bad, I agree with the others who are saying that Slaanesh, Daughters, and OBR are among the worst battletomes so far, and I'd add FEC onto that pile as well. Slaanesh was just a mess of poorly written rules that were clearly never tested in an actual game. Meanwhile Hagg Nar, Petrifex Elite and Gristlegore overshadow every other option in their entire book by such a ridiculous margin that there was really no reason to write any other allegiances. GW really needs to get someone on staff other than the writers to edit these things for internal and external balance before they go to press, because some of this stuff never should have seen the light of day in its current form.

[Zanzou]

22 minutes ago, l1censetochill said:

Slaanesh was just a mess of poorly written rules that were clearly never tested in an actual game. Meanwhile Hagg Nar, Petrifex Elite and Gristlegore overshadow every other option in their entire book by such a ridiculous margin that there was really no reason to write any other allegiances. GW really needs to get someone on staff other than the writers to edit these things for internal and external balance before they go to press, because some of this stuff never should have seen the light of day in its current form.

I also personally find it bizarre that certain rules ever made it past a first pass, let alone published in a battletome, let alone left untouched in a broken state so long despite public outcry.  Some of these issues in particular just seem so obvious, that most community members end up immediately noticing them on their first read-through of the book on release day.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Zanzou

[Beastmaster]

Yeah, that IS weird. All that work into design, layout, proof reading, translation etc, but no time/money/manpower to have some experienced tournament player doing a peer review before printing?

Edited January 17, 2020 by Beastmaster

[Galas]

23 minutes ago, Beastmaster said:

Yeah, that IS weird. All that work into design, layout, proof reading, translation etc, but no time/money/manpower to have some experienced tournament player doing a peer review before printing?

It is intentional guys. Theres no other way around. 

[Forrix]

26 minutes ago, Beastmaster said:

Yeah, that IS weird. All that work into design, layout, proof reading, translation etc, but no time/money/manpower to have some experienced tournament player doing a peer review before printing?

I've wondered how much of this is an effect of a rushed release schedule and an iterative design process. For FEC its possible they play tested but Gristlegore was a last minute addition that never got probably tested due to time constraints. Or it was the mount trait that was last minute. Granted inconsistency in power level has always been an issue (looking at LoN and DoK when they first came out).  And some stuff doesn't really need testing to see how crazy it is. I still remember listening to Stormcast when they mentioned Petrifix Elite getting +1 save across the board and my initial reaction was "hmmm... That's going to be difficult to balance with the other sub-factions or god-forbade no sub faction".